From: Olaf Fraczyk <olaf@navi.pl>
To: Liam Girdwood <l_girdwood@bitwise.co.uk>
Cc: BALBIR SINGH <balbir.singh@wipro.com>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why HZ on i386 is 100 ?
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 12:01:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020416100148.GA17560@venus.local.navi.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AAEGIMDAKGCBHLBAACGBEEONCEAA.balbir.singh@wipro.com> <1018952961.31914.446.camel@swordfish>
On 2002.04.16 12:29 Liam Girdwood wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 09:18, BALBIR SINGH wrote:
> > I remember seeing somewhere unix system VII used to have HZ set to
> 60
> > for the machines built in the 70's. I wonder if todays pentium iiis
> and ivs
> > should still use HZ of 100, though their internal clock is in GHz.
> >
> > I think somethings in the kernel may be tuned for the value of HZ,
> these
> > things would be arch specific.
> >
> > Increasing the HZ on your system should change the scheduling
> behaviour,
> > it could lead to more aggresive scheduling and could affect the
> > behaviour of the VM subsystem if scheduling happens more frequently.
> I am
> > just guessing, I do not know.
> >
>
> I remember reading that a higher HZ value will make your machine more
> responsive, but will also mean that each running process will have a
> smaller CPU time slice and that the kernel will spend more CPU time
> scheduling at the expense of processes.
>
Has anyone measured this?
This shouldn't be a big problem, because some architectures use value
1024, eg. Alpha, ia-64.
And todays Intel/AMD 32-bit processors are as fast as Alpha was 1-2
years ago.
Regards,
Olaf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-16 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-04-16 7:47 Why HZ on i386 is 100 ? Olaf Fraczyk
2002-04-16 8:14 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-04-16 8:18 ` BALBIR SINGH
2002-04-16 10:29 ` Liam Girdwood
2002-04-16 10:01 ` Olaf Fraczyk [this message]
2002-04-16 13:35 ` Terje Eggestad
2002-04-16 13:38 ` Mark Mielke
2002-04-16 13:55 ` Terje Eggestad
2002-04-16 15:32 ` Rik van Riel
2002-04-16 16:12 ` Chris Friesen
2002-04-16 17:12 ` Mark Mielke
2002-04-16 13:58 ` Alan Cox
2002-04-17 0:22 ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-04-16 16:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-04-16 16:50 ` David Mosberger
2002-04-16 17:18 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-04-16 17:52 ` David Mosberger
2002-04-16 18:10 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-04-17 0:49 ` David Mosberger
2002-04-17 0:57 ` Robert Love
2002-04-17 1:07 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-04-17 5:18 ` Mark Mielke
2002-04-17 5:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-04-17 6:01 ` Robert Love
2002-04-17 6:17 ` David Mosberger
2002-04-17 7:59 ` arjan
2002-04-17 8:04 ` Matti Aarnio
2002-04-23 22:42 ` Albert D. Cahalan
2002-04-17 10:12 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-04-18 1:51 ` Dan Mann
2002-04-17 1:22 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-04-17 3:19 ` Ben Greear
2002-04-17 7:55 ` Helge Hafting
2002-04-21 18:00 ` Pavel Machek
2002-04-22 17:20 ` John Alvord
2002-04-22 21:52 ` george anzinger
2002-04-22 23:06 ` J.D. Bakker
2002-04-22 23:26 ` Anton Blanchard
2002-04-23 19:03 ` george anzinger
2002-04-23 7:08 ` Alan Cox
2002-04-22 17:24 ` David Mosberger
2002-04-16 12:42 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-04-16 12:31 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-04-16 14:04 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-04-16 21:34 ` bert hubert
2002-04-16 22:21 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-04-16 22:37 ` Herbert Xu
2002-04-16 22:56 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-04-17 0:34 ` J. Dow
2002-04-17 2:40 ` Herbert Xu
2002-04-17 12:44 ` Kent Borg
2002-04-17 8:28 ` please merge 64-bit jiffy patches. Was " bert hubert
2002-04-17 11:05 ` please merge 64-bit jiffy patches Tim Schmielau
2002-04-17 11:12 ` bert hubert
2002-04-17 12:33 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-04-17 12:42 ` bert hubert
2002-04-17 14:57 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-04-17 11:09 ` please merge 64-bit jiffy patches. Was Re: Why HZ on i386 is 100 ? Wakko Warner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-16 10:41 Cabaniols, Sebastien
2002-04-17 0:33 Chen, Kenneth W
2002-04-17 1:02 ` Davide Libenzi
[not found] <3CC4861C.F21859A6@mvista.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
[not found] ` <E16zuPf-0007yD-00@the-village.bc.nu.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2002-04-23 7:17 ` Andi Kleen
2002-04-23 19:09 ` george anzinger
2002-04-24 1:42 ` Alan Cox
2002-04-24 20:20 ` george anzinger
2002-04-27 20:26 ` Alan Cox
2002-04-28 6:02 ` george anzinger
2002-04-28 9:12 ` Alan Cox
2002-04-28 17:34 ` george anzinger
2002-04-28 18:59 ` Alan Cox
2002-04-28 21:50 ` george anzinger
2002-04-29 0:14 ` Alan Cox
2002-04-23 19:24 ` george anzinger
2002-04-23 19:35 ` Andi Kleen
2002-04-24 17:25 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020416100148.GA17560@venus.local.navi.pl \
--to=olaf@navi.pl \
--cc=balbir.singh@wipro.com \
--cc=l_girdwood@bitwise.co.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox